Model comparison
GPT-5.4 vs Kimi K2.6
Head-to-head evidence from 38 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: GPT-5.4 #11; Kimi K2.6 #13
Evidence parity. GPT-5.4 and Kimi K2.6 share 38 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 16 results are unique to GPT-5.4; 22 to Kimi K2.6.
Updated July 13, 2026- Shared results
- 38
- GPT-5.4 only
- 16
- Kimi K2.6 only
- 22
- Comparable categories
- 5 / 8
Pick GPT-5.4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.6 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 38 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.4 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 85 to 74. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 57.6 against 42.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 52.1% to 34.7%. Kimi K2.6 does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-5.4 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.50 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.95 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens for Kimi K2.6. That is roughly 3.8x on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 256K for Kimi K2.6.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | GPT-5.4 | Δ | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-5.442.5 | Margin→ 24.6 | Kimi K2.667.1 |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.457.6 | Margin← 15.4 | Kimi K2.642.2 |
| Coding | GPT-5.457.7 | Margin→ 14.9 | Kimi K2.672.6 |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.473.2 | Margin→ 6.6 | Kimi K2.679.8 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.477.2 | Margin← 3.7 | Kimi K2.673.5 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 52.1%B 34.7%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 17.4HLE: GPT-5.4 scored 52.1%; Kimi K2.6 scored 34.7%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 27.100%B 14.580%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 12.5FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GPT-5.4 scored 27.100%; Kimi K2.6 scored 14.580%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 47.600%B 38.966%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 8.6FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-5.4 scored 47.600%; Kimi K2.6 scored 38.966%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 75.1%B 66.7%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 8.4Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.4 scored 75.1%; Kimi K2.6 scored 66.7%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 82.8%B 80.4%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 2.4CharXiv: GPT-5.4 scored 82.8%; Kimi K2.6 scored 80.4%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 | Kimi K2.6 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 output | Kimi K2.6$0.95 input / $4 output | Kimi K2.6 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.474 tok/s | Kimi K2.6Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.4151.79 s | Kimi K2.6Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.41.05M | Kimi K2.6256K | GPT-5.4 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.4 wins25 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Kimi K2.6 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 75.1% | 66.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| CyberGymSource | 79.0% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 82.7% | 83.2% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 75% | 73.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 70.6% | 55.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| ToolathlonSource | 54.6% | 50% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Tau2-TelecomSource | 87.1% | 95.9% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | 60.3% | 62.3% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| DeepSearchQASource | 73.6% | 92.5% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 41.1% | 30.3% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 33.3% | 28.5% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 44.8% | 34.5% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1395 | 1190 | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.89% | 56.82% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 15.3% | 18.0% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| JobBenchSource | 38.9% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 6.0% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | — | 80.8% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 4.6% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 809 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 19.6% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 38.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 0.0% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 31.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 20.6% | Not comparable |
CodingKimi K2.6 wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Kimi K2.6 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.7% | 58.6% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| React Native EvalsSource | 85.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 67.42% | 37.89% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 71.0% | 61.8% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 57.6% | 43.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 56.6% | 53.5% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 80.2% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 89.6% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | — | 89.6% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 76.7% | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | — | 52.2% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 66.7% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | — | 47.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | — | 65.9% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.4 wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Kimi K2.6 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 92.8% | 90.5% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| HLESource | 52.1% | 34.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 39.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 92.8% | 90.5% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| HealthBench HardSource | 40.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | 59.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 51.4% | 44.2% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.0% | 91.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 41.6% | 35.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 5.7% | 6.4% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 50.0% | 32.8% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 88.6% | 39.3% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 48.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
MathKimi K2.6 wins5 benchmarks
MultimodalKimi K2.6 wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Kimi K2.6 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 81.2% | 79.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | 53.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | 82.1% | 80.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| CharXivSource | 82.8% | 80.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| ERQASource | 65.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | 61.1% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 85.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | 41.0% | — | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | 77.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1672 | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 78.4% | 79.4% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1264 | 1318 | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| MathVisionSource | — | 87.4% | Not comparable |
| V*Source | — | 96.9% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | Kimi K2.6 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 73.9% | 76.0% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (6)
Which is better, GPT-5.4 or Kimi K2.6?
GPT-5.4 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 85 to 74. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 52.1% and 34.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.4 or Kimi K2.6?
GPT-5.4 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 57.6 versus 42.2. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.4 or Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.6 versus 57.7. Inside this category, Vibe Code Bench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, GPT-5.4 or Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 67.1 versus 42.5. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 or Kimi K2.6?
GPT-5.4 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 73.5. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, GPT-5.4 or Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.8 versus 73.2. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.